49 games unbeaten for me. What Chelsea achieved under Mourinho was incredible, but going 49 games without a single defeat in the league is quite some record. With that said, looking at the players we had, we only got one trophy for that achievement and we were capable of so much more, so I believe we underachieved in that respect.
However, this is slightly off topic, there's also been a debate between which achievement was better between United's treble winning season and Arsenal's invincibles. Surely it has to be United's treble winning season? They won three trophies, and for all the praise we got for going 49 games undefeated (and rightly so), we only got one trophy.
No doubt that for romanticism the Invincibles are the best.
Don't even know why i have got drawn into this, this thread was made numerous times on the old 606 and every one just went round in circles.
Is there any other reasons you Arsenal fans can give apart from 'invicibles' ?
Good achievement, but the team the following season smashed the points tally record and still holds that record, had one of the most impregnable defence's ever in Premier League history, won more games then Arsenal in the Premier league compared to the invincibles, and also over the seasons lost fewer games.
Surely a team the gained more points is better, a team the conceded less is better, a team that won more is better, a team the lost fewer games is better?
Incredible that were it not for one rush of blood to Van Nistelrooy's head, and one clueless challenge from Paul Ferreira, ths thread would've been turned upside down
I believe Chelsea won 2 trophies that season Samir, therefore you're saying Chelsea are better?
The football of the Invincibles was better. Nothing really compares to the style of that team. When you have artists like Henry, Bergkamp and Pires you are forced to just sit back and enjoy the show, nomatter who you support.
Arsenal's invincible run wasn't the result of an impregnable defense, although it was fantastic, but an unstoppable attack.
Only Chelsea fans would think they had anything over that team, good as their 05 team was.
Hey guys
Arsenal fans think Arsenal
Chelsea fans think Chelsea
Add to that the 'invincibles' went of the boils after that one good seasons, we went on to dominate the league for another season.
believe Chelsea won 2 trophies that season Samir, therefore you're saying Chelsea are better?
---
Did they?
Ah right, well, I'm not going to change my tune. So reluctantly, yes, by my own definition, Chelsea had the better achievement as they won more.
But going 49 games unbeaten in the league is remarkable nonetheless and I highly doubt it'll ever be done again.
Only Chelsea fans would think they had anything over that team
-------------------------------------------------------------
Strange, because we beat that team. Arsenal couldn't beat Jose's
If only we had Akinfenwa in 04/05, then this wouldn't even be a debate
'Add to that the 'invincibles' went of the boils after that one good seasons, we went on to dominate the league for another season.'
But Arsenal were better in the 1930s, therefore the Invincibles were better.
Chelsea had the better achievements, but Arsenal had the better team, which is why I also said in the same comment that when you look at the calibre of players we had, we definitely should have won more than just one trophy. So yeah I do believe we did underachieve given the quality we had.
Psychologist, I don't care, it's about the season, not a game. And Arsenal's Invincibles are widely regarded as the best Premier League team ever.
Going unbeaten is remarkable, and I respect it.
But I'm just only looking at what team was stronger, no matter how pretty how ugly, how defensive how attacking, what kind of special trophy was made, what sounds better etc... And to me I just can't see past Chelsea.
Comparing these teams to the 99 utd team will be a lot harder, as they did not overlap.
comment by Samir (U2630)
posted 8 seconds ago
Chelsea had the better achievements, but Arsenal had the better team, which is why I also said in the same comment that when you look at the calibre of players we had, we definitely should have won more than just one trophy. So yeah I do believe we did underachieve given the quality we had.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
I have said that so many times about your lot, while Wenger has done well in a financial sense with Arsenal, 3 title's and 4 FA Cup's in 16 years is a poor return considering the quality of players you have had, not just in them years but recent years too.
I have said that so many times about your lot, while Wenger has done well in a financial sense with Arsenal, 3 title's and 4 FA Cup's in 16 years is a poor return considering the quality of players you have had, not just in them years but recent years too.
---
Don't forget the community shields But yes, I tend to agree.
Girlouski if it's about the season then surely Chelsea had a better season, unless I am looking at the numbers wrong.
comment by Andrei Sergeyevich Arshavin - I am James Bond... (U4416)
posted 4 minutes ago
'Add to that the 'invincibles' went of the boils after that one good seasons, we went on to dominate the league for another season.'
But Arsenal were better in the 1930s, therefore the Invincibles were better.
-------------------------------------------------
I didn't realise Pires, Henry, Viera...etc were all playing for Arsenal in the 1930s?
Arsenal's Invincibles are widely regarded as the best Premier League team ever.
---------------------------------------------------------
It's widely regarded there's one true love God. Doesn't make it fact.
If you wanna reference the seasons as a whole to be your supporting argument, Jose's team achieved the most points in history. That's what the league season is about, points tally. Argo, Chelsea 05 would be the best PL team ever until someone overhauls it.
You lost a game, we did not.
It's like comparing Messi to Ronaldo. Messi grew organically at his club from his youth, and his supreme talent is a joy to watch.
Ronaldo came in for record amounts of cash and worked extremely hard to match Messi who had been dominating the league before him and achieves comparable or even superior statistics. But deep down, you just know Messi is better. It's just everything.
The Invincibles are Messi.
comment by The Psychologist - I Lived To See RDM's Rendition of the AVB Project (first 20 min impressions, hmmm... not sure, no hook as yet) (U6522)
posted 34 seconds ago
Arsenal's Invincibles are widely regarded as the best Premier League team ever.
---------------------------------------------------------
It's widely regarded there's one true love God. Doesn't make it fact.
If you wanna reference the seasons as a whole to be your supporting argument, Jose's team achieved the most points in history. That's what the league season is about, points tally. Argo, Chelsea 05 would be the best PL team ever until someone overhauls it.
-------------------------------------------------------------------
Didn't we also win the most amount of games in a season, and conceded the least? However we didn't get a little tiny trophy made for us, so it must of been rubbish
Sign in if you want to comment
Who was better...
Page 2 of 4
posted on 20/9/12
49 games unbeaten for me. What Chelsea achieved under Mourinho was incredible, but going 49 games without a single defeat in the league is quite some record. With that said, looking at the players we had, we only got one trophy for that achievement and we were capable of so much more, so I believe we underachieved in that respect.
However, this is slightly off topic, there's also been a debate between which achievement was better between United's treble winning season and Arsenal's invincibles. Surely it has to be United's treble winning season? They won three trophies, and for all the praise we got for going 49 games undefeated (and rightly so), we only got one trophy.
posted on 20/9/12
No doubt that for romanticism the Invincibles are the best.
posted on 20/9/12
Don't even know why i have got drawn into this, this thread was made numerous times on the old 606 and every one just went round in circles.
posted on 20/9/12
Is there any other reasons you Arsenal fans can give apart from 'invicibles' ?
Good achievement, but the team the following season smashed the points tally record and still holds that record, had one of the most impregnable defence's ever in Premier League history, won more games then Arsenal in the Premier league compared to the invincibles, and also over the seasons lost fewer games.
Surely a team the gained more points is better, a team the conceded less is better, a team that won more is better, a team the lost fewer games is better?
posted on 20/9/12
Incredible that were it not for one rush of blood to Van Nistelrooy's head, and one clueless challenge from Paul Ferreira, ths thread would've been turned upside down
posted on 20/9/12
I believe Chelsea won 2 trophies that season Samir, therefore you're saying Chelsea are better?
posted on 20/9/12
*Paulo Ferreira, this
posted on 20/9/12
The football of the Invincibles was better. Nothing really compares to the style of that team. When you have artists like Henry, Bergkamp and Pires you are forced to just sit back and enjoy the show, nomatter who you support.
Arsenal's invincible run wasn't the result of an impregnable defense, although it was fantastic, but an unstoppable attack.
Only Chelsea fans would think they had anything over that team, good as their 05 team was.
posted on 20/9/12
Hey guys
Arsenal fans think Arsenal
Chelsea fans think Chelsea
posted on 20/9/12
Add to that the 'invincibles' went of the boils after that one good seasons, we went on to dominate the league for another season.
posted on 20/9/12
believe Chelsea won 2 trophies that season Samir, therefore you're saying Chelsea are better?
---
Did they?
Ah right, well, I'm not going to change my tune. So reluctantly, yes, by my own definition, Chelsea had the better achievement as they won more.
But going 49 games unbeaten in the league is remarkable nonetheless and I highly doubt it'll ever be done again.
posted on 20/9/12
Only Chelsea fans would think they had anything over that team
-------------------------------------------------------------
Strange, because we beat that team. Arsenal couldn't beat Jose's
posted on 20/9/12
If only we had Akinfenwa in 04/05, then this wouldn't even be a debate
posted on 20/9/12
'Add to that the 'invincibles' went of the boils after that one good seasons, we went on to dominate the league for another season.'
But Arsenal were better in the 1930s, therefore the Invincibles were better.
posted on 20/9/12
Chelsea had the better achievements, but Arsenal had the better team, which is why I also said in the same comment that when you look at the calibre of players we had, we definitely should have won more than just one trophy. So yeah I do believe we did underachieve given the quality we had.
posted on 20/9/12
Psychologist, I don't care, it's about the season, not a game. And Arsenal's Invincibles are widely regarded as the best Premier League team ever.
posted on 20/9/12
Going unbeaten is remarkable, and I respect it.
But I'm just only looking at what team was stronger, no matter how pretty how ugly, how defensive how attacking, what kind of special trophy was made, what sounds better etc... And to me I just can't see past Chelsea.
Comparing these teams to the 99 utd team will be a lot harder, as they did not overlap.
posted on 20/9/12
comment by Samir (U2630)
posted 8 seconds ago
Chelsea had the better achievements, but Arsenal had the better team, which is why I also said in the same comment that when you look at the calibre of players we had, we definitely should have won more than just one trophy. So yeah I do believe we did underachieve given the quality we had.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
I have said that so many times about your lot, while Wenger has done well in a financial sense with Arsenal, 3 title's and 4 FA Cup's in 16 years is a poor return considering the quality of players you have had, not just in them years but recent years too.
posted on 20/9/12
I have said that so many times about your lot, while Wenger has done well in a financial sense with Arsenal, 3 title's and 4 FA Cup's in 16 years is a poor return considering the quality of players you have had, not just in them years but recent years too.
---
Don't forget the community shields But yes, I tend to agree.
posted on 20/9/12
Girlouski if it's about the season then surely Chelsea had a better season, unless I am looking at the numbers wrong.
posted on 20/9/12
comment by Andrei Sergeyevich Arshavin - I am James Bond... (U4416)
posted 4 minutes ago
'Add to that the 'invincibles' went of the boils after that one good seasons, we went on to dominate the league for another season.'
But Arsenal were better in the 1930s, therefore the Invincibles were better.
-------------------------------------------------
I didn't realise Pires, Henry, Viera...etc were all playing for Arsenal in the 1930s?
posted on 20/9/12
Arsenal's Invincibles are widely regarded as the best Premier League team ever.
---------------------------------------------------------
It's widely regarded there's one true love God. Doesn't make it fact.
If you wanna reference the seasons as a whole to be your supporting argument, Jose's team achieved the most points in history. That's what the league season is about, points tally. Argo, Chelsea 05 would be the best PL team ever until someone overhauls it.
posted on 20/9/12
*loving God
posted on 20/9/12
You lost a game, we did not.
It's like comparing Messi to Ronaldo. Messi grew organically at his club from his youth, and his supreme talent is a joy to watch.
Ronaldo came in for record amounts of cash and worked extremely hard to match Messi who had been dominating the league before him and achieves comparable or even superior statistics. But deep down, you just know Messi is better. It's just everything.
The Invincibles are Messi.
posted on 20/9/12
comment by The Psychologist - I Lived To See RDM's Rendition of the AVB Project (first 20 min impressions, hmmm... not sure, no hook as yet) (U6522)
posted 34 seconds ago
Arsenal's Invincibles are widely regarded as the best Premier League team ever.
---------------------------------------------------------
It's widely regarded there's one true love God. Doesn't make it fact.
If you wanna reference the seasons as a whole to be your supporting argument, Jose's team achieved the most points in history. That's what the league season is about, points tally. Argo, Chelsea 05 would be the best PL team ever until someone overhauls it.
-------------------------------------------------------------------
Didn't we also win the most amount of games in a season, and conceded the least? However we didn't get a little tiny trophy made for us, so it must of been rubbish
Page 2 of 4